1. Work Place
    1. Boomers
    2. GenX
      1. Peter Sheahan - Gen Y Consultant, author of Fiip
    3. GenY
      1. Youthquake - Businessweek 080901 cover story.
      1. MMQB_080114_Millennials.rtf
    4. Productivity
    5. Competing Cultures
    6. Distributed Work
    7. Social Networks
  2. Sustainability
  3. Integrated Platform
  4. Integrated Business Case
  5. Integrated Design/BIM
  6. Integrated Delivery
    1. Extreme Project Management by Doug deCarlo
    2. The Toyota Way by Jeffrey Liker
    3. The Toyota Product Development System
  7. Pre-Assembled Construction Strategy
    1. Refabricating Architecture
  8. mindshift Scorecard
  9. Transformation
    1. Value Redesigned by Kyle Davy and Susan Harris (book summary)
    2. The Next Architect by James Cramer and Scott Simpson
  10. Changing World
    1. The World is Flat by Thomas Friedman
    2. Wikinomics by Don Tapscott
    3. The Long Tail by Chris Anderson
    4. The Wealth of Networks by Yochai Benkler
  11. A&D Article Summaries and Links
    1. Drafting Meets Technology - How to recapture excellence with technological efficiency
    2. The business of Architecture changes slowly - Firm Culture  Andrew Pressman FAIA 
    3. Integrated Practice - A New Model
  12. Construction Article Summaries and Links
    1. History of the CM at Risk Model
    2. Challenges to Innovation and Lean Construction
    3. Lean Construction 2000 - 2006

Work Place

  • Boomers

 

  • Productivity

 

  • Competing Cultures

 

  • Distributed Work

 

  • Social Networks

 

Sustainability

 

Integrated Platform

 

Integrated Business Case

Integrated Design/BIM

 

Integrated Delivery

 

  1. Extreme Project Management by Doug deCarlo

  2. The Toyota Way by Jeffrey Liker

  3. The Toyota Product Development System

 

Pre-Assembled Construction Strategy

 

  1. Refabricating Architecture

 

mindshift Scorecard

 

Transformation

 

  1. Value Redesigned by Kyle Davy and Susan Harris (book summary)

  2. The Next Architect by James Cramer and Scott Simpson

     

Changing World

 

  1. The World is Flat by Thomas Friedman

  2. Wikinomics by Don Tapscott

  3. The Long Tail by Chris Anderson

  4. The Wealth of Networks by Yochai Benkler

 

 

A&D Article Summaries and Links

 

These articles provide context for discussion.  We would like your feedback, input and reference to additional articles.

 

Drafting Meets Technology - How to recapture excellence with technological efficiency

 

The above link provides the full article.  Here is an intro:

 

by Grant A. Simpson, FAIA, and James B. Atkins, FAIA

 

Architects and their instruments of service have become a target for disputes and litigation at an increasing rate in recent years. Rarely is there a major project where the drawings and specifications are not subjected to scrutiny by parties claiming to be harmed by the documents or looking to find a source of harm within them.

 

Design professionals are greatly challenged by this turn of events, and we ask why and how it is happening. What has changed about architecture and our services? Do professionals have fewer skills than in years past? Or is it that contractors are not as experienced or skillful and thus unable to build from architectural drawings? Are CAD drawings inherently less thorough than documents of the past? Perhaps the appearance of accuracy implied by CAD has changed owners’ and contractors’ expectations? Or is it that there are simply too many lawyers?

 

The business of Architecture changes slowly - Firm Culture

 Andrew Pressman FAIA 

 

"Firm billings increased 11 percent between 2002 and 2005, to reach $28.7 billion annually."

 

"The big challenge for firms is recruiting appropriate talent to support all that growth, and finding and retaining the best people is clearly an ongoing strategic priority. This is also boosting wages. One short-term and perhaps less-than-ideal solution is outsourcing: Just over one third of firms outsource work frequently or when workloads are heavy. Only 8 percent of those firms say they send work offshore."

 

"Moreover, small firms are still dominant, with 96 percent of all offices, yet large offices (50 or more employees) control almost 42 percent of all staff, and almost 52 percent of all billings. Predictably, the largest firms, according to the survey, also have much higher average net billing per employee—$143,000 in firms with 50 or more employees, while firms with fewer than 20 average $83,000."

 

"The report states that overall, few firms use BIM software (about 10 percent are using it for billable work), and most of those are the larger firms."

 

"One of the challenges that architects face is convincing some clients that excellent (or even good) building performance should be a priority and an integral part of the design process from a project’s inception. The data in the AIA firm survey may, however, be a great resource to assist in developing a persuasive argument for promoting the trend in green design."

 

"An expected trend regarding project delivery, noted by Mark Zweig, founder of the AEC management consulting firm ZweigWhite, is that even though traditional design-bid-build is still the most dominant method—accounting for 60 percent of firm billings—it is slowly being superceded by other methods. It has declined 5 percent since 2002. While design-build receives much attention as the delivery method that will replace design-bid-build, it was construction-management-at-risk that made the greatest gains, increasing from 6.9 percent to 10 percent. Conventional construction-management accounts for 13.5 percent, and contractor-led design-build grabs about 9.6 percent. For the first time, architect-led design-build has been called out separately, and represented a scant 3.9 percent of all firm billings."

 

"The idea that design-bid-build is being supplanted by other delivery methods has implications for development of specific skill sets for future architects and, therefore, for architectural education. This paradigm shift, according to David W. Hinson, AIA, chair of the architecture program at Auburn University, in Alabama, suggests that the construction phase will be just as collaborative as the design phases. “The importance of working in teams will extend dramatically deeper into the project timeline,” says Hinson. The art of collaborating and negotiating must be integrated into courses across the curriculum, including design studio, architectural technology, and professional practice."

 

Integrated Practice - A New Model

Andrew Pressman FAIA

 

Integrated practice (IP) is the term that is being assigned to this collaborative process. IP is a meaningful response to the ongoing marketplace mandate for buildings that are faster to design and construct, at lower cost, as well as more sustainable and of higher quality than those built in the past. Building information modeling (BIM) is enabling— some say forcing—this information-sharing, integrated-practice culture to emerge.

 

The shakeout of what the building information model and its supporting technology means for teams engaging in integrated practice has begun and continues at a rapid pace. And there are a number of significant consequences that affect firm culture, standard contracts, liability insurance and risk management, compensation, and professional education.

 

Perhaps the biggest cultural change is not learning how to use new tools and technology, but rather the attitude adjustment required to collaborate effectively with the entire team from the start.

 

this calls for “the alignment of project goals across the entire project team and a fundamental understanding that the project has to start coming together at kickoff rather than after procurement. Today’s increasingly complex projects require the input of a broad-based team.”

 

“Architects should concentrate on leadership rather than ownership; on design rather than avoiding risk,”

 

“The senior-level people must be committed to achieving a common outcome, with financial or other incentives to keep that singular mind-set in place. The success of a team-based process is a function of mutual cooperation and mutual benefit,”

 

Diane J. Hoskins, AIA, the executive director of Gensler... “With BIM, we no longer have an assembly-line process; this means our young staff need to understand the whole project so they can work effectively across plan, section, detail, and elevation. It is a steep learning curve in the first several years of one’s architectural maturation.”

 

Integrated practice will drive changes to contracts in order to facilitate working in teams, sharing information, and fairly allocating liability risk, compensation, and responsibility. Changes will most likely occur incrementally with “the continued growth of design-build, tweaked conventional contracts, and increased experimentation with transformational methods like ‘project alliancing,’

 

...surely new fee arrangements will align the collaborative effort, inherent risk, and whether there is added value in leading this team-based design process. At the very least, all the front-end work associated with BIM suggests a reallocation of fee by phase—assuming traditional phases in this transition period.

 

James R. Brogan, AIA, senior associate principal at Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates and director of the firm’s IT, claims that the clearly articulated lines between traditional phases of design will blur, and the way they are codified in standard AIA contracts will eventually be restructured. Business terms between owner, architect, and all stakeholders will reflect the new relationships and responsibilities among the design teams. It is even possible that the project-alliance system gaining acceptance in other parts of the world, in which bonuses or penalties are awarded or assessed based on overall team performance relative to specific outcomes, will gain acceptance here.

 

"...a fee for services based on value to the owner is perhaps a more salient method than ever with IP."

 

"Most people interviewed for this article agree that the advantages of integrated practice will not be fully realized until contractors come to the table as team members early on as well as consultants. But for that to happen, clients have to become confident that committing to a design-build team and guaranteed maximum price will be better than risking the delays, potential for litigation, and costs that seem inherent in the design-bid-build process. The debate has been going on for decades."

 

Construction Article Summaries and Links

 

History of the CM at Risk Model

The rationale for this difference in selection procedure is that it’s difficult to define and measure the experience, wisdom or creativity of AEs. And AEs typically represent their client’s interests with a fiduciary responsibility. So clients avoid bidding and look for the most qualified firm.

 

But today, increasing industrialization and specialization in the construction industry invalidate this conventional wisdom. Building construction can be entirely subcontracted. And most of the cost and technical knowledge for the manufactured portion of buildings resides with specialty trade contractors and manufacturers. GCs are now managers of multiple subcontractors

and specialists. They win work by skillful purchasing and management of subcontracts.

 

The old way

Traditional construction projects are characterized by high risk. In traditionally bid construction contracts, subcontractor prices are verbally collected in a few weeks with little legal support and frequent misunderstandings about scope responsibility among subcontractors and general contractors.

 

Subcontractors often align with their favored general contractors, providing them with a lower price than their competitors. Yet no one general contractor has the entire set of best prices. And in the bidding process subcontractors float high bids early in the bidding cycle, afraid that their bid will leak to their competitors. As the bid deadline approaches, the prices drop.

 

 

The lower prices aren’t always communicated to all the bidders. Furthermore, some subcontractors will pad bids, anticipating bid shopping after the contract is awarded. Competition among the subcontractors may be limited. Friendly relationships may influence who works on the project. The process is unprofessional, unbusinesslike and not cost-effective.

 

A GC is therefore aligned with subcontractors, manufacturers and suppliers in opposition to the AE and the client. Conflict is common. Plans and specifications always contain errors, clients always make changes, and bids always contain either speculation or outright errors. The result is strained relationships, and the work inevitably suffers.

 

The new way

CM at Risk minimizes risk for everyone. The experience, wisdom, creativity or engineering skills of AE and CM firms are combined at the table with the client’s understanding of requirements. This group has more complete control and unity. Together they command the classic tripod of functional requirements, design and construction. They are non-adversarial. They collaborate to make decisions. The CM can review the AE’s drawings and often catches errors, reducing the AE’s and client’s risk. The AE can review the CM’s approach to the work, making helpful recommendations.

 

 

The CM is allowed to take bids or proposals from subcontractors during completion of contract documents, prior to the GMP, which reduces the CM’s risk and provides useful input to design. The procedure is more methodical, manageable, predictable and less risky for all. The procurement of construction is also more business-like. Each trade contractor has a fair shot at being the low bidder without fear of bid shopping.  Each must deliver the best bid to get the project, so the client winds up with the low sub-set of prices. Competition in the community is more equitable: all subcontractors have a fair shot at the work.

 

AIA Overview of The Construction Manager at Risk

 

Challenges to Innovation and Lean Construction

This article is dated but provides a good foundation for understanding the issues moving to Lean Construction.

"The conclusion is that the prevalent theory of construction is deficient and implicit, and this is the major barrier for innovation in the construction industry."

 

19th Century View

"Firstly, the total transformation can be achieved only by realising all parts of it. Thus, we decompose the total transformation into parts, finally into tasks, ensure that all inputs are available and assign these tasks to operatives or workstations. Secondly, minimising the cost of each task, i.e. each decomposed transformation, minimises the cost of production."

 

"An early proponent was Taylor (1913) who viewed that the task idea as the most prominent single element in scientific management This view can also easily be recognised as the underlying theory of project management, for example."

 

20th Century Shift

"Frank and Lillian Gilbreth (1922) suggested the view of production as a flow. The central idea was to introduce time as a resource of production."

 

"The first principle of this theory is to eliminate waste, i.e. nontransformation activities. The maybe most important insight related to the flow concept is that time compression leads to waste reduction. Another powerful principle states that variability reduction leads to waste reduction. This is the underlying concept of JIT, lean production and business process re-engineering.

The conceptualisation of production"

 

"The conceptualisation of production as value generation was proposed by Shewhart (1931) at the outset of the quality movement..."

 

The Challenge Going Lean

"...the theory of construction is an application of the generic theory of production to the characteristic context of construction: one-of-a-kind production, site production and temporary project organisation..."

 

"In consequence of the absence of radical managerial innovations, present practice of construction management is characterised partly by methods originating from the craft period, partly by leftovers from manufacturing, especially centralised control."

 

"...the present underlying theory behind construction management is simply counterproductive, and leads to a systematic creation of added costs and reduced functionality in construction."

 

 

"a second issue playing a role, namely construction peculiarities (one-of-akindness, site production, temporary production). Because of these, flows are more variable and complex than otherwise, and also value generation is hindered."

 

Lack of Industrialization for Construction

"The share of prefabricated components has gradually risen, but a breakthrough for industrialised construction has still not occurred."

 

Conclusions

"The issue is that construction cannot effectively innovate due to constraints caused by the intrinsic organisation of construction practice (peculiarities, institutional problems), and deficiencies in the present theory (theoretical deficiencies). On the other hand, the managerial mode and organisation of construction cannot be altered without radical innovation and adequate theory. Therefore, the way forward is to develop an adequate and explicit theory of production in construction that stimulates radical innovation, which in turn facilitates topdown and bottom-up innovation processes in firms."

 

 

Lean Construction 2000 - 2006

 

This survey suggests that the industry still needs to develop a solid business case for Lean Construction.  Building an integrated business case linking these new paradigms lies at the heart of Operation Mindshift's mission.

 

Topics under-represented:

 

Strategy – The keyword strategy appeared in four occasions in the following terms: corporate strategy, competitive strategy, delayed differentiation strategy and postponement strategy. This indicates a lack of papers that describe cases in which Lean Construction implementation has actually been linked to business strategy. Besides, questions such as “Does lean construction improve construction companies’ competitiveness and market share?” 

 

 

Return on Investment – Papers on cost management can be found in the sample analyzed, however, only one paper mentions as a keyword the term “return on investment”. This may be a prolific topic to be researched as it would provide the  IGLC community an idea of the costs and benefits related to Lean Construction adoption and convince owners to ask for lean project delivery.

 

Contracts –  ...with a few exceptions...the IGLC community has been slow to respond to the challenge of studying relational contracting. We speculate that this may be due to the fact that IGLC researchers have stronger relationships with designers, contractors, and fabricators than the owners who decide on the types of contracts to use on AEC projects. Despite this limitation, we suggest that researchers strive to understand how to implement relational contracting, measure its outcomes, and explain project results to help provide guidance to owners that are interested in working towards lean project delivery.

 

 

 


Page Information

  • 5 months ago [history]
  • View page source
  • You're not logged in
  • No tags yet learn more

Wiki Information

Recent PBwiki Blog Posts